https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4870-4878
![Sample our Health and Social Care journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5938/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Health-Social-Care.jpg"})
ABSTRACT
A web-based 2 (preexisting position: vaccine-inclined vs. -hesitant) by 2 (message type: scientific evidence vs. misinformation) experimental study was conducted to investigate individuals’ processing of misinformation (vis-à-vis scientific evidence) on the vaccine-autism link within the framework of epistemic egocentrism. Data (N = 996) collected with Qualtrics panel demonstrated that preexisting position shaped individuals’ responses to vaccine-related messages differently such that vaccine-hesitant individuals processed the message more superficially while vaccine-inclined individuals more systematically. There was evidence that involvement moderated information processing. Vaccine-hesitant and -inclined individuals’ intentions to seek further information and to engage others with opposite views in public deliberation were shaped by message perception and source perceptions (trustworthiness and expertise), but in different patterns. Implications of the findings for vaccine-related health communication are discussed.
Notes
1. The uni-model (Kruglanski et al., Citation1999) argues that the two modes of information processing only differ in evidential contents relevant to a conclusion, rather than in qualitative manners.
2. Other approaches to measuring message processing in the literature include: 1) self-report measures (e.g., Likert scale items) based on the definition of message elaboration (e.g., Reynolds, Citation1997), and, p. 2) an index of evaluative cognitive responses with the thought-listing technique (Cacioppo & Petty, Citation1981), for example, Das and Fennis (Citation2008).
3. The current study is part of a larger project that includes three other components not reported in this paper: 1) There is another study with a similar design, but with more outcome variables and on a different topic. 2) Emotional responses to messages. And 3) additional individual variables that are believed to predict emotional responses, but less likely to impact cognitive processing of messages.
4. Data used in this study are available at: Mendeley Data, V1, doi: 10.17632/tkyzcgt8gv.1.